Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Change the laws if you don't like them. The girls were above the age of consent. Not sure why you don't get that.

---

Again, the facts.

Quote:

---

The Virginia legal Age of Consent for sexual contact is 18 years old. Eleven states have set their age of consent at 18 years old, the highest legal age of consent in any state.

A close in age exception to the Virginia legal age of consent allows teenagers aged 15, 16 and 17 to engage in sexual acts, but only with a partner younger than 18. Consensual sex where one partner is 15, 16 or 17 and the other is over 18 is a class 1 misdemeanor.

---

You may like it at 16 in Canada but I happen to think 47 year old men don't have any business preying on teenagers under 18. Apparently Cucinelli doesn't either, and it is his job to defend the laws of the state which is what you guys are condemning him for.

The post that started this discussion was from you and you wrote:

Quote:

---

The sex was between a 47-year-old man and two teenagers above Virginia's age of consent."

---

When did those facts change?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

The post that started this discussion was from you and you wrote:


When did those facts change?

---

That was based on Tal's sourced article. The facts changed here:

Quote:

---

I actually don't believe in anti-sodomy laws, I believe in protecting teens from perverts. It actually seems your source was mistaken on the facts however. Via WaPo:

Quote:

---

Quote:
The appeals court ruled on the 2005 conviction of a 47-year-old Virginia man for contributing to the delinquency of a minor and for criminal solicitation of a 17-year-old girl to commit sodomy.

---

So, are you OK with 47 year old men sexing up minors and trying to get a blow job from a 17-year-old girl or not? That is the question before you.

---

Also supported here and here.

Cuccinelli looks to go on offense against McAuliffe over Virginia anti-sodomy law - Washington Post

Quote:

---

“We agree with the attorney general and do not want child predators out there,” Parrish said, adding that if Cuccinelli thinks the state's other laws aren't adequate to prosecute predators, “he needs to introduce language that addresses the problem. .  . . A blanket sodomy law has no place in Virginia or any other place.”

In 2004, when Cuccinelli served in the state Senate, he voted against a measure that would have altered the sodomy law to no longer cover private consensual acts among adults. In 2009, he said he believed “homosexual acts are wrong and should not be accommodated in government policy.”

---

You wanted facts, I got facts.

That guy wants to prohibit consensual anal and oral sex for all adults. He is a republican of course.
You can't make this stuff up!

So, are you OK with 47 year old men sexing up minors and trying to get a blow job from a 17-year-old girl or not? That is the question before you.

Funny how you guys whine about the GOP 'distractions' like the IRS scandal but when it comes to the future mayor of NYC treating his wife like dirt while continuing the same behavior that led to his resignation, and the mayor of San Diego harassing his employees to the point that the city attorney is requiring female reporters to have a male cameraman with them to interview the guy, you b*tch about a man doing his job in protecting minors from predators and representing his constituents.

Talk about distractions and misplaced priorities.

Quote:

---

doing his job in protecting minors from predators

---

No he's not. He is trying to make illegal oral and anal sex for all adults! Have you ever received oral sex from your wife?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

No he's not. he is trying to make illegal oral and anal sex for all adults! Have you ever received oral sex from your wife?

---

Wrong, the law was already on the books and as AG he was indeed defending the laws of the state in protecting minors. Tal raised the issue, I corrected the facts and suddenly you don't want to talk about the case.

So, are you ok with 47 year old men sexing up minors and trying to get a blow job from a 17-year-old girl or not? That is the question before you.

P.S. I repeat, I don't believe in anti-sodomy laws among consenting adults. I believe in protecting teens from predators.

There are already laws against sex with minors. Is this the only state without one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

There are already laws against sex with minors. Is this the only state without one?

---

Um, one more time s l o w l y.

That's the point, he was defending current law - his job as attorney general - when Tal tried to make him look bad with incorrect facts.

Mother Jones, his source, said the case was about "sex was between a 47-year-old man and two teenagers above Virginia's age of consent."

But that isn't true, the case is about a 47 year "contributing to the delinquency of a minor and soliciting oral sex from a 17 year old girl. The age of consent is 18.

Basically, you guys are trying to make Cucinelli look extreme for doing his job and protecting minors. How pathetic.

And still, no one answers the question. Are you OK with 47 year old men sexing up minors and trying to get a blow job from a 17-year-old girl or not?

"the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit that said Virginia’s “Crimes Against Nature” law, which bans oral and anal sex, was invalid in light of the 2003 Supreme Court decision. "

Your guy wants that law to still be valid. I get it. He wants to dictate wants consenting adults do in the bedroom.

Also, Dems say:
“We agree with the attorney general and do not want child predators out there,” Parrish said, adding that if Cuccinelli thinks the state’s other laws aren’t adequate to prosecute predators, “he needs to introduce language that addresses the problem. . . . A blanket sodomy law has no place in Virginia or any other place.”

Also:
"In 2004, when Cuccinelli served in the state Senate, he voted against a measure that would have altered the sodomy law to no longer cover private consensual acts among adults. "

You just want to change the subject since the facts didn't quite work out. Sorry.

Quote:

---

Um, one more time s l o w l y.

That's the point, he was defending current law - his job as attorney general - when Tal tried to make him look bad with incorrect facts.

Mother Jones, his source, said the case was about "sex was between a 47-year-old man and two teenagers above Virginia's age of consent."

But that isn't true, the case is about a 47 year "contributing to the delinquency of a minor and soliciting oral sex from a 17 year old girl. The age of consent is 18.

Basically, you guys are trying to make Cucinelli look extreme for doing his job and protecting minors. How pathetic.

And still, no one answers the question. Are you ok with 47 year old men sexing up minors and trying to get a blow job from a 17-year-old girl or not?

---

Answer the question.

Quote:

---

You just want to change the subject

---

No, that IS the subject: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ml#post3514263

You're the one that is focused on teen girls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

No, that IS the subject: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ml#post3514263

---

Exactly right

Quote:

---

You're the one that is focused on teen girls.

---

Again, exactly right. You source said it was about sex between consenting adults but that's a lie, it's about sex with underage teens.

One more time, And still, no one answers the question. Are you ok with 47 year old men sexing up minors and trying to get a blow job from a 17-year-old girl or not?

It's not complicated.

Because we're not talking about one particular situation, we're talking about legislation that affects everyone. That's what adults do.

Plus I answered your question here: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ml#post3514791

Quote:

---

but that's a lie, it's about sex with underage teens.

---

Nah, you've lost it.

Health Care Ruling Takeaway: Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli Is a Bad Lawyer | Mother Jones

Quote:

---

But Cuccinelli's legal work isn't, of course, about the law. It's about politics. His concern with constitutional issues is rather selective. Otherwise, how to explain his office's defense of local law enforcement officials in the state arresting gay men under sodomy laws the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional eight years ago? Or his legal opinion that state universities have no legal right to protect students and staff against anti-gay discrimination, despite the 14th Amendment's promises of equal protection under the law? Or what of his waste of taxpayer dollars suing over the health care bill in a case he had no legitimate right to bring? The health care lawsuit won Cuccinelli fans across the country, who will no doubt come in handy when he needs to raise money when he runs for senator or governor down the road. All of that might make him a good politician, but it still makes him a bad lawyer.

---

Quote:

---

Cuccinelli wants the court to revive the prohibition on consensual anal and oral sex, for both gay and straight people. (The case at hand involves consensual, heterosexual oral sex, but, as the New York Times explained in 2011, it's "icky": The sex was between a 47-year-old man and two teenagers above Virginia's age of consent.)*

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Because we're not talking about one particular situation, we're talking about legislation that affects everyone. That's what adults do.

Plus I answered your question here: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ml#post3514791

Nah, you've lost it.

---

Dude, the original complaint you just cited was deceptive and based on incorrect information. If you can't handle answering your own damn complaint based on the facts then you should probably just shut up.

Quote:

---

you should probably just shut up.

---

Tea bagger. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Health Care Ruling Takeaway: Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli Is a Bad Lawyer | Mother Jones

---

What part of those facts are wrong do you not get?

Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - It's come to this - Rev. 2

The case is not about sex between consenting adults, it was about a 47 year "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" and soliciting oral sex from a 17 year old girl. The age of consent is 18.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Tea bagger. LOL

---

Oh how mature. You're beyond pathetic, but at least we know you've run out of arguments.